During Avi Loeb’s interview, he mentions that he believes that scientists should be more transparent about their findings, making information public before it is fully confirmed, with the obvious disclaimer that it is not a consolidated finding yet. I would've liked to ask him how transparent scientists should be when addressing the public – not in an ideal scenario, but in our current world. Should scientists say that almost all models are wrong, and that we can never be sure of anything, due to the epistemological nature of science? While I believe most educated people will recognize that even if the models are not 100% right, the rigor required by scientific research makes those findings or principles more correct than common sense or some random thing they happen to believe in. The problem would arise with “deniers” of all kinds, who would likely think that even if science says they are wrong, because science is “inherently” wrong, then they are as correct as the scientists, which is just plain wrong. It’s an obvious fallacy, but that doesn’t mean that people won’t think like that, and it doesn’t mean that their actions due to that worldview aren’t harmful. So, I would have wanted to ask him how should the scientific community tackle the issue of transparency, as to not decrease the credibility of science in the eyes of the general public.